Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SONY CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`YISSUM RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
`
`OF THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Cases IPR2013—00218 (Patent 6,665,003 B1)
`IPR2013—00219 (Patent 7,477,284 B2)
`
`Deposition of
`
`TREVOR J. DARRELL, Ph.D.
`
`Wednesday, November 6, 2013
`
`FILE NO. 13—16497
`
`REPORTED BY:
`
`JOHN WISSENBACH,
`
`RDR, CRR, CBC, CCP,
`
`CLR, CSR 6862
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 1 of 134
`
`1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SONY CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`YISSUM RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
`
`OF THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Cases IPR2013—00218 (Patent 6,665,003 B1)
`IPR2013—00219 (Patent 7,477,284 B2)
`
`Deposition of
`
`TREVOR J. DARRELL, Ph.D.
`
`Wednesday, November 6, 2013
`
`FILE NO. 13—16497
`
`REPORTED BY:
`
`JOHN WISSENBACH,
`
`RDR, CRR, CBC, CCP,
`
`CLR, CSR 6862
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 1 of 134
`
`1
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`BE IT REMEMBERED that, pursuant to the laws
`
`governing the taking and use of depositions, on
`
`Wednesday, November 6, 2013, commencing at 10:31 a.m.
`
`thereof, at the law offices of Tensegrity Law Group LLP,
`
`555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 360, Redwood Shores,
`
`California, before me,
`
`JOHN WISSENBACH, CSR 6862,
`
`personally appeared TREVOR J. DARRELL, Ph.D., called as
`
`a witness by the Petitioner, who, being by me first duly
`
`sworn, was thereupon cross—examined by the Patent Owner
`
`as a witness in said action.
`
`APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`
`For the Petitioner:
`
`KENYON & KENYON LLP
`
`BY: WALTER E. HANLEY, JR., Attorney at Law
`MICHAEL E. SANDER, Attorney at Law
`One Broadway
`New York, New York 10004—1007
`(212) 908—6263 whanley@kenyon.com
`(212) 908—6412 msander@kenyon.com
`
`For the Patent Owner:
`
`IRFAN ESSA, Ph.D.
`
`TENSEGRITY LAW GROUP LLP
`
`BY: WILLIAM NELSON, Attorney at Law
`555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 360
`Redwood Shores, California 94065
`(650) 802—6075
`william.nelson@tensegritylawgroup.com
`
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`BY:
`GREGORY P. HUH, Attorney at Law
`2505 North Plano Road, Suite 4000
`Richardson, Texas 75082—4101
`(972) 639—6939
`gregory.huh@haynesboone.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 2 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`INDEX OF EXAMINAT I ONS
`
`WITNESS:
`
`TREVOR J. DARRELL, Ph . D .
`
`Cross—Examination by Mr. Nelson
`
`EXHIBITS
`
`MARKED
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`Exhibit YRD—2007
`
`Image (YRD—ZOO?)
`
`PRIOR EXHIBI TS REFERENCED
`
`———OOO———
`
`Sony—1003
`
`Sony—2004
`
`Sony—1006
`
`Sony—1010
`
`Sony—1013
`
`Sony—1040
`
`Sony—1113
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 3 of 134
`
`3
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`MR. NELSON:
`
`I guess we need to enter
`
`appearances. My name is William Nelson.
`
`I'm here on
`
`behalf of the patent owner, Yissum_Research Development
`
`Corporation and HumanEyes Technologies. With me is
`
`Gregory Huh and Irfan Essa.
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`I'm Walter Hanley, representing
`
`the petitioner, Sony Corporation. With me is Michael
`
`Sander. We are both from Kenyon & Kenyon.
`
`CROSS—EXAMINATION BY MR. NELSON
`
`Q. Okay. Professor Darrell, are you ready to
`
`proceed here today?
`
`Yes.
`
`Very good. Have you had your deposition taken
`
`
`
`Yes.
`
`How many times, as an expert, sir?
`
`Four or five or six.
`
`I can't remember the
`
`Maybe once in this building already.
`
`How many times have you had your deposition
`
`an expert in a patent case?
`
`As I said, around a half dozen.
`
`Would you list the matters in which you've
`
`served as an expert and had your deposition taken.
`
`A.
`
`I've provided that to the counsel who I'm
`
`working with.
`
`I don't —— I don't have it by memory.
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 4 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`NELSON: Counsel, has that been provided to
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`I'm not sure I've seen it,
`
`actually.
`
`THE WITNESS: Well,
`
`then I would not ——
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`So if —— and when you say
`
`"counsel" —— do you mind if I ask him?
`
`NELSON: No.
`
`HANLEY:
`
`To whom are you referring?
`
`WITNESS:
`
`The counsel who is sitting to my
`
`
`
`MR. HANLEY: Okay.
`
`So ——
`
`THE WITNESS: Not to my ——
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`I will look into that.
`
`I don't ——
`
`I've seen his CV.
`
`I don't recall his CV listing the
`
`cases in which he's testified.
`
`So if it's not on the
`
`CV,
`
`then we'll have to look into ——
`
`MR. NELSON: Okay.
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`—— where that information can
`
`MR. NELSON: Well ——
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`—— put together.
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`I have a document I can provide
`
`if you'd like.
`
`BY MR. NELSON:
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 5 of 134
`
`5
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Rather than ——
`
`I can try and recite them by memory if you'd
`
`Please.
`
`How far back do you want me to go?
`
`Oh, since 2008.
`
`2008?
`
`So I worked as a —— it was a fact
`
`
`
`witness for a matter involving Microsoft, and I think it
`
`was called Impulse,
`
`regarding to technology from Alive,
`
`the Alive system. And I'm_currently retained as an
`
`expert in a matter in London by the firm called
`
`Bristows. And that involves Philips and Nintendo on
`
`a —— and I'm an expert in a case in their judiciary
`
`about infringement of one of Philips' patents.
`
`I worked with Quinn,
`
`in this building, on the
`
`Samsung—Apple fun stuff, as you,
`
`I'm sure, are aware of.
`
`And my patent was dropped from the case before it went
`
`to trial, but —— and I was driving down here to do a
`
`deposition when I was informed of that.
`
`So I didn't get
`
`to participate in that —— that trial.
`
`Then —— yeah,
`
`I can't —— it's hard for
`
`remember. One of the first ones I ever did was
`
`company called Cytyc,
`
`involving imaging systems
`
`cytology screening,
`
`that I was deposed and went to a
`
`mock trial.
`
`I also did one for Quinn in San Francisco
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 6 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`involving Bally Gaming, for imaging systems in gaming
`
`tables in Los Vegas. And that's just what's coming off
`
`the top of my head,
`
`so —— I sort of ——
`
`Q.
`
`Thank you.
`
`A. Yeah.
`
`
`
`Q. With respect to your service as an expert in
`
`patent infringement or patent matters, how many of those
`
`engagements have you served as an expert on behalf of
`
`the patent holder?
`
`A. About three. Well, served as an expert? Have
`
`I worked for the patent holder? Around three of them,
`
`including the current one with Philips.
`
`MR. NELSON: Before we move on,
`
`I forgot the
`
`one thing I said I was going to do, which is that I
`
`wanted to note with Mr. Hanley and Mr. Sander on the
`
`record that —— we'll talk about the implementation
`
`details perhaps after the deposition, but that the
`
`intent of this deposition is to serve as a single
`
`deposition for the 218 and 219 matters, rather than
`
`having two distinct depositions of Professor Darrell as
`
`to these issues at this time.
`
`MR. HANLEY: We agree with that.
`
`MR. NELSON:
`
`Thank you.
`
`Q. Professor Darrell, have you ever created images
`
`for stereoscopic viewing?
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 7 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Certainly.
`
`How many times?
`
`I can't count.
`
`I can't remember.
`
`More than you can count?
`
`Yes.
`
`Q. When was the last time you created an image for
`
`stereoscopic viewing?
`
`A. That's a good question.
`
`So as a professor,
`
`I
`
`don't personally do the research, but often I direct the
`
`research,
`
`so images would have been created,
`
`in my
`
`supervision, of course. We use stereo —— we —— we,
`
`including myself and the collaborators in my research
`
`projects, have used stereo cameras in a number of
`
`research projects over the years, most notably those
`
`which involve the perception and tracking of objects and
`
`people. And the —— those systems would collect stereo
`
`images, and we would often view them to verify their
`
`nature.
`
`Q.
`
`So I appreciate your answer, but my question
`
`
`
`is, when was the last time you did this?
`
`A.
`
`I don't recall the specific date.
`
`Q. Have you ever created a left—eye and right—eye
`
`image for stereoscopic viewing by taking portions of
`
`images and mosaicing them together?
`
`A.
`
`I don't have a specific recollection of that.
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 8 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Most of the stereo images that I've been —— that I've
`
`created or were used in my work came from specific
`
`stereo camera rigs that collected_images that were meant
`
`for display and processing.
`
`Q.
`
`I just want to make sure I understand your
`
`answer. When you say you don't have a specific
`
`recollection of that, do you have any recollection of
`
`ever creating left and right—eye images for stereoscopic
`
`viewing by taking portions of images and mosaicing them
`
`together?
`
`A.
`
`I believe I just answered that question.
`
`I
`
`said I don't have a specific recollection. That means I
`
`don't have a recollection.
`
`Now you've answered my question.
`
`Thank you.
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Is there a difference?
`
`Q. Yes.
`
`Have you ever created a panoramic image for
`
`stereo viewing?
`
`A. That would roughly be the same thing that you
`
`just asked, as well.
`
`So I do not have a specific
`
`recollection of that.
`
`Q. Again, my problem is with your word
`
`"specific
`
`recollection."
`
`If you don't recall ever doing it, I'd
`
`like to get that answer.
`
`A.
`
`I don't —— it's a natural thing to have done.
`
`DepoServices.c0m
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 9 of 134
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`I don't recall personally having done it.
`
`Q.
`
`Thank you. When were you first engaged by
`
`counsel as an expert in connection with the —— with
`
`Sony's inter partes reexamination petition?
`
`A.
`
`I don't recall the date.
`
`Q.
`
`Do you recall the time frame generally?
`
`A. No.
`
`I mean,
`
`they —— I've —— I was speaking
`
`with these counsel prior to that as well.
`
`So I don't
`
`remember exactly when that event happened.
`
`Q.
`
`You were engaged by counsel for Sony in
`
`connection with a matter before the International Trade
`
`Commission;
`
`is that correct?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`How many hours have you spent working on your
`
`declaration or any other role in connection with Sony's
`
`IPR petitions?
`
`A.
`
`I don't recall a specific number.
`
`It's on the
`
`order of several dozen.
`
`Q.
`
`Several dozen hours?
`
`A.
`
`Uh—huh.
`
`Q.
`
`What's your hourly fee?
`
`A.
`
`$400.
`
`Should I increase it?
`
`(Discussion off the record.)
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`$400. And I was making an
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—ZOOB I Page 10 of 134
`
`10
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`irrelevant comment, asking if I should increase it.
`
`BY MR . NELSON:
`
`Q. We'll see.
`
`A. One never knows what the going rate is.
`
`Q. Have you billed Sony yet for your work in
`
`connection with this IPR?
`
`A.
`
`I believe ——
`
`Q. Or these IPRs?
`
`I believe I have.
`
`And you've paid.
`
`I D
`
`But, again,
`
`I only have a sporadic recognition.
`
`I have several clients.
`
`Q.
`
`Do you know the amount that you billed Sony for
`
`your work on this petition?
`
`A.
`
`I don't recall.
`
`It was —— I think it was
`
`around $5,000. That's my guess. Maybe more. But I
`
`haven't billed for all the time that I've put in.
`
`You're being paid for your testimony today?
`
`A. My time, yes.
`
`I don't believe I'm being paid
`
`for my testimony.
`
`Q. What were you asked by counsel to do in
`
`connection with the IPR petitions?
`
`A.
`
`I don't remember.
`
`You mean originally, when they first started ——
`
`they've asked me to provide declarations or reports.
`
`epoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—ZOOB I Page 11 of 134
`
`1 1
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`can't remember what they're specifically called, but
`
`have certain statements. And they asked me to review
`
`certain documents that they provided to me and discuss
`
`with them various points of those documents.
`
`Q. Have you ever reviewed source code associated
`
`with any product or technology produced by HumanEyes
`
`Technologies?
`
`MR. HANLEY: Objection.
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`NO.
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`Irrelevant.
`
`
`
`THE WITNESS: Not to my knowledge.
`
`BY MR. NELSON:
`
`Q. Have you ever reviewed any document produced in
`
`litigation by HumanEyes Technologies in connection with
`
`your work for Sony?
`
`MR. HANLEY: Objection;
`
`irrelevant.
`
`THE WITNESS: Unless they've provided it ——
`
`only if they've provided it to me.
`
`I have no idea what
`
`those documents would be.
`
`BY MR. NELSON:
`
`Q.
`
`Do you have any recollection of being provided
`
`with any document produced in litigation by HumanEyes
`
`Technologies in connection with your work for Sony?
`
`MR. HANLEY:
`
`Same objection.
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`I —— how would I know if it
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 12 of 134
`
`12
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`had —— what such documents would be?
`
`I mean,
`
`I know
`
`it's —— I've never been told I have been, and it's never
`
`been —— there's never been markings to that effect on a
`
`document that I've seen.
`
`BY MR. NELSON:
`
`Q.
`
`I understand that you've provided several
`
`declarations in connection with these petitions.
`
`Is
`
`that right?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed in those
`
`declarations, what materials did you rely upon?
`
`A.
`
`I relied on various documents that the counsel
`
`sitting to my left provided to me,
`
`including the patents
`
`that are at issue and various pieces of prior art that
`
`are discussed in my report. Or is it a report or a
`
`declaration?
`
`I can't remember.
`
`Can I refer to it as my
`
`
`
`report?
`
`Q. That's up to you.
`
`A. Okay.
`
`The document.
`
`Q.
`
`Is it your understanding that all of the
`
`written material which you relied upon for your
`
`declarations is listed in those declarations?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. Apart from_counsel, did you meet with or speak
`
`with any person in connection with your investigation of
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 13 of 134
`
`13
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`the issues discussed in your declarations?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q.
`
`You didn't meet with Hiroshi Ishiguro?
`
`A. No, not if you —— not in conjunction with the
`
`statements in my declaration.
`
`Q. Have you ever met with Hiroshi Ishiguro?
`
`A.
`
`I may have.
`
`I don't recall.
`
`Q.
`
`To use your words, do you have a specific
`
`recollection of meeting with Hiroshi Ishiguro?
`
`A.
`
`I mean, I've been to Osaka University, and I
`
`probably met him when I went there,
`
`so —— I don't
`
`remember exactly which ones —— who I met at that time.
`
`Q. Have you ever spoken with Masashi Yamamoto?
`
`A. Again,
`
`these are all professionals who go to
`
`all of the annual conferences. And so I don't have a
`
`
`
`specific recollection, but I would have generally
`
`interacted with them professionally over the years. But
`
`I certainly have never spoken specifically about these
`
`patents or these papers with them.
`
`Q.
`
`How about Saburo Tsuji, T—S—U—J—I?
`
`A.
`
`Same answer.
`
`Q. With respect to Kawakita, have you ever met
`
`with Yasuhiro Kawakita?
`
`A.
`
`I'm not familiar —— I don't think I know him.
`
`And I don't think I've ever met him.
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 14 of 134
`
`14
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Yoshitaka Hamaguchi?
`
`Same answer.
`
`Toshihiko Miyazaki?
`
`Same answer.
`
`Q. Were any of the opinions stated in any of your
`
`declarations in these petitions opinions that were
`
`provided you by counsel?
`
`A. No,
`
`they're my opinions.
`
`Q.
`
`In connection with forming the opinions stated
`
`in your declarations, did you review or were you shown
`
`anything which contradicted your stated opinions?
`
`A. Could you repeat that question?
`
`Q.
`
`Sure.
`
`In connection with the analysis that you
`
`undertook to form the opinions stated in your
`
`declarations, did you review or were you shown anything
`
`which you regarded as contradicting ——
`
`
`
`No.
`
`—— your stated opinions?
`
`No.
`
`Q. Were there any opinions that you provided to
`
`your counsel that were not included in your
`
`declarations?
`
`A.
`
`I've certainly talked about a lot of things
`
`about a lot of topics with counsel and —— so not
`
`everything I've said to counsel is written in those
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 15 of 134
`
`15
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`declarations. But there were no specific opinions that
`
`were directly relevant to the formal opinions in those
`
`declarations that differed,
`
`in my opinion, as I see it.
`
`Q. Were there any opinions that you were asked by
`
`counsel to give but refused to give?
`
`A. No.
`
`When you say opinions —— I mean,
`
`I —— I was
`
`never asked to give an opinion,
`
`in the sense they never
`
`said, "Could you say this." You mean asked —— yeah,
`
`I'm
`
`not sure if I totally understand your question. But I
`
`never refused to say anything or refused to put
`
`something, you know ——
`
`Q. Well,
`
`I think we're there, but let me try a
`
`
`
`different way of asking the question.
`
`A.
`
`Sure.
`
`Q. Was there any conclusion or statement you were
`
`asked to offer by counsel but you refused to do so?
`
`A. No. But I would never accept counsel telling
`
`me what to say anyway, so ——
`
`Q.
`
`I didn't ask about telling you to say.
`
`I asked
`
`you about being asked to support a conclusion.
`
`A. Yes, no.
`
`The answer to your question is no.
`
`Q. Okay.
`
`A. But it also would reflect the wrong way of
`
`doing the —— of having opinions,
`
`in my view.
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 16 of 134
`
`16
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Q. With respect to the opinions stated in your
`
`declarations here, did you perform any experimentation
`
`to confirm your conclusions?
`
`A. No.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`You relied,
`
`then, on your analysis of the
`
`written materials that are listed in your declaration?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`I'm just going to pull out the various
`
`declarations so that we have them in front of us.
`
`Why don't I get them all together, and then
`
`I'll hand them over to you.
`
`I am handing you and your counsel here what has
`
`previously been marked by Sony in these matters as Sony
`
`Exhibit 1010, Sony Exhibit 1113, Sony Exhibit 1013, Sony
`
`Exhibit 1040. And at this point, Professor Darrell,
`
`I'm
`
`not going to dive in yet.
`
`I would just like you to
`
`confirm that you know what those documents are.
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. And I've got some questions for you about
`
`them
`
`there.
`
`Do you know what those documents are?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. What are they?
`
`A. They're my expert declarations that were
`
`provided in this matter.
`
`Q. Apart from these four documents, are you aware
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—ZOOB I Page 17 of 134
`
`17
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, PhD.
`
`of any other declaration that you've offered in
`
`connection with these petitions?
`
`A. Before the patent trial board? No. However ——
`
`yeah, no.
`
`Q.
`
`So looking at Exhibit Sony—1010 —— do you have
`
`it in front of you?
`
`A.
`
`I do.
`
`Q. This is your March 28 or your original
`
`declaration in connection with the '003 patent petition?
`
`F”
`
`Is that a question?
`
`Q.
`
`Do you think it's a question?
`
`
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`Q.
`
`Is it?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Are you okay?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`I just go a little ——
`
`I can get you some water.
`
`I actually have a little bit.
`
`I'm_a little
`
`cold.
`
`If that AC can be turned off,
`
`that might be nice.
`
`But not too much.
`
`Q.
`
`In connection with this declaration, it states
`
`that you reviewed the patent,
`
`in paragraph 6;
`
`is that
`
`correct?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`It also states that you reviewed a "Certified
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 18 of 134
`
`18
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`English Translation of VRSJ Research Report."
`
`Do you
`
`see that?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. This is —— will you agree with me that we can
`
`for this deposition call that certified English
`
`translation the Kawakita reference or the Kawakita
`
`article?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`
`
`Q. Okay. And you'll know what I'm talking about
`
`when I say that?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`It also says in paragraph 9(b)
`
`that you
`
`reviewed an article titled "Acquiring Omnidirectional
`
`Range Information," by Ishiguro, et al.
`
`Is that
`
`correct?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Can I call that,
`
`for this deposition,
`
`Ishiguro,
`
`or the Ishiguro reference, and you'll know that we're
`
`talking about this article?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. Okay.
`
`So just to confirm,
`
`there's nothing else
`
`here in this declaration that you state that you
`
`reviewed or analyzed or did to generate the conclusions
`
`or opinions stated here;
`
`is that correct?
`
`A. Correct.
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 19 of 134
`
`19
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Q. And not only is —— is that what you state,
`
`that's the truth. You didn't look at anything else?
`
`A. Not to make the conclusions in this document.
`
`Q. Let's look at Sony Exhibit ——
`
`A. Let me —— I just want to amend that by saying,
`
`for example,
`
`there are other versions of that Ishiguro
`
`paper,
`
`like the one at the ICCV conference that I
`
`reviewed. But it's not necessary to support the
`
`conclusion of this document.
`
`Q. Well, did you rely on that other version ——
`
`A. Not in this document.
`
`Q.
`
`—— of —— I apologize for pausing, but this
`
`record's going to get messed up if you cut me off each
`
`time.
`
`So give me a minute to finish.
`
`Thank you. All
`
`right.
`
`Did you rely on that other version of Ishiguro
`
`or any other article or writing not disclosed in this
`
`declaration in forming the opinions stated in this
`
`
`
`declaration?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q.
`
`Thank you. Let's look at Exhibit Sony 1113.
`
`Actually, let's —— let's step back.
`
`I
`
`apologize.
`
`I'd like to go back to 1010.
`
`With respect to Kawakita, what was your
`
`assignment by counsel for this declaration.
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 20 of 134
`
`20
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`A.
`
`I'm not sure what
`
`" assignment" means here.
`
`What were you asked to do?
`
`A.
`
`I was asked to review these documents and
`
`review the patent and make statements about the content
`
`of some of the prior art,
`
`the —— some of the content of
`
`Kawakita and Ishiguro.
`
`Q. At any time during your analysis that led to
`
`this declaration, did your assignment change?
`
`A.
`
`I mean, we would —— did it change?
`
`Over the months of having conversations with
`
`the counsel sitting to my left,
`
`they asked me various
`
`questions about various documents.
`
`So I never —— I
`
`never felt that I had a formal assignment. With regard
`
`to this declaration,
`
`this is all they asked me to do.
`
`Q. With respect to Kawakita, did counsel ask you
`
`to state the opinion that "Kawakita discloses a
`
`technique to generate" stereo —— "stereoscopic panoramic
`
`images by excising slit images from images captured by a
`
`rotating camera and mosaicing the respective slit images
`
`
`
`together"?
`
`A. Could you repeat the question?
`
`Q.
`
`Sure. With respect to Kawakita, did counsel
`
`ask you to state the opinion that "Kawakita discloses a
`
`technique to generate stereoscopic panoramic images by
`
`excising slit images from_images captured by a rotating
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 21 of 134
`
`21
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`camera and mosaicing the respective slit images
`
`together"?
`
`A.
`
`So I was not given the specific instruction to
`
`make a specific statement.
`
`I was not asked to state a
`
`specific conclusion.
`
`I was asked to describe my opinion
`
`on what Kawakita disclosed. And I then made that
`
`statement.
`
`Did I answer your question?
`
`Yes, sir.
`
`Were you asked to render an opinion on whether
`
`Kawakita discloses each element of any claim of the '003
`
`
`
`patent?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q. And same question with respect to Ishiguro.
`
`Were you asked to render an opinion on whether Ishiguro
`
`discloses each element of any claim of the '003 patent?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q.
`
`Thanks for your patience.
`
`Let's look at the —— Sony—1113. You agree with
`
`me that is your second declaration in connection with
`
`the '003 patent, dated June 27th, 2013?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Do you agree with me that you don't state any
`
`opinion about any prior art reference in this
`
`declaration?
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 22 of 134
`
`22
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. Was there any —— with respect to this
`
`declaration, was there any opinion you were asked to
`
`offer but did not?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q. Let's take a look at Sony—1013. Let me know
`
`when you're there.
`
`A.
`
`I have it in front of me.
`
`Q.
`
`Do you agree with me that this is your first
`
`declaration in connection with the IPR petition related
`
`to the '284 patent?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`Paragraph 6 of this declaration, Sony—1013,
`
`states that you reviewed the '284 patent; you —— as well
`
`as the '003 patent.
`
`Is that what you did?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. Okay.
`
`Paragraph 9(a) states that you reviewed
`
`Kawakita, correct?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Paragraph 9(b) states that you reviewed the
`
`Ishiguro reference?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`In connection with the opinions about Kawakita
`
`stated in paragraph 10,r did you review any other
`
`document or did you rely on any other document other
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 23 of 134
`
`23
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`than what we've just discussed?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q.
`
`In connection with your opinion about Ishiguro
`
`at paragraph 11, apart from_Ishiguro, as well as the
`
`patents, did you rely on any other document in
`
`generating the opinions stated in paragraph 11?
`
`A.
`
`No specific document.
`
`I referred to common
`
`sense, however.
`
`Q.
`
`In connection with Sony—1013, with respect to
`
`Kawakita and Ishiguro only —— I don't intend to ask you
`
`about the other parts of —— of this declaration today ——
`
`what was your assignment?
`
`A.
`
`I'm not sure what "assignment" means here.
`
`Can
`
`you be more specific?
`
`Q. What were you asked to do?
`
`A.
`
`I was asked to make a declaration that
`
`
`
`described the content of Kawakita and Ishiguro regarding
`
`the generation of stereoscopic panoramic images.
`
`Q.
`
`In the course of your analysis that led you to
`
`express the opinions stated in paragraphs 10 and 11 of
`
`Sony—1013, were there any changes or modifications to
`
`what you were asked to do?
`
`A. No.
`
`Q. Any opinions that you were asked to give but
`
`refused to give?
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 24 of 134
`
`24
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`A. No.
`
`Q. Let's look at Sony—1040.
`
`Do you agree with me
`
`that this is your second declaration in connection with
`
`the IPR petitions concerning the '284 patent?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q. Why did you do a different declaration?
`
`A.
`
`I was asked to do so. And I don't recall the
`
`reason the counsel sitting to my left desired it.
`
`Q.
`
`For your opinions expressed in paragraph 10,
`
`letters (a)
`
`through (e),
`
`regarding Kawakita, did you
`
`rely on any information in forming those opinions other
`
`than your past as an expert, your reading of Kawakita,
`
`and your reading of the patents?
`
`A. Only the items listed in paragraph 9.
`
`Q.
`
`For your opinions expressed regarding Ishiguro
`
`in paragraph 11, did you rely on anything other than
`
`
`
`what's stated in paragraph 9(b) and 6?
`
`A.
`
`9(b) and 6? Sorry.
`
`No,
`
`I did not.
`
`I only relied on those.
`
`Q.
`
`By the way, Professor Darrell, we didn't talk
`
`about it, but I know you've had enough depositions to
`
`know that if you ever decide you need a break or need to
`
`stop, or you've gone on for a while,
`
`just let me know,
`
`and I'm happy to take a pause.
`
`A.
`
`Thank you.
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 25 of 134
`
`25
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`Q.
`
`So just so that I understand your testimony
`
`before we move on, with these four different
`
`declarations in front of you, your earlier testimony was
`
`that you estimated the amount of time that you spent in
`
`your work to prepare these declarations was in the
`
`possibly dozens of hours;
`
`is that right?
`
`A. Several dozens.
`
`Q. Several dozens of hours.
`
`Professor Darrell, what is a stereoscopic
`
`image?
`
`A.
`
`"Stereoscopic image" is a broad term but most
`
`naturally would be defined as a pair of images that view
`
`a scene from_multiple —— that view a scene from two
`
`different viewpoints, although you can have
`
`generalizations of that concept that have more than two
`
`views.
`
`Q.
`
`So just so I understand, your testimony that ——
`
`is that a stereoscopic image has as its most natural
`
`meaning a pair of images that view a scene from two
`
`
`
`different viewpoints?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Do I have that right?
`
`A. Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Is there anything else that you'd add to that
`
`natural or most natural definition?
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 26 of 134
`
`26
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`A. No.
`
`Q.
`
`Now, you did say it was a broad term. Are
`
`there other meanings that you believe, as an expert,
`
`could be ascribed to the term "stereoscopic image"?
`
`A.
`
`You can have multiview stereo, where you have
`
`more than two, and the like.
`
`Q. Anything else that comes to mind?
`
`A. Not that's relevant right now.
`
`Q. Humor me. Anything that might not be relevant
`
`in the judgment of Professor Darrell but that
`
`nonetheless ——
`
`A. Not right now.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`In view of your definition of a stereoscopic
`
`image,
`
`is —— my next question was going to be, do you
`
`have an understanding or —— of the term "stereoscopic
`
`image pair." And is it —— based on that definition that
`
`you've given, do you think they're one and the same, a
`
`stereoscopic image and a stereoscopic image pair are the
`
`same thing?
`
`A. Generally, yes.
`
`Q. What's your reaction, as an expert,
`
`to this
`
`definition?
`
`A stereoscopic image pair is "two images...of a
`
`scene recorded from_slightly displaced positions, which,
`
`when viewed simultaneously by the respective eyes,
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 27 of 134
`
`27
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`provides a perception of depth."
`
`A.
`
`It seems reasonable, although maybe not
`
`completely limiting. One could have stereo with wider
`
`baselines,
`
`for example.
`
`Q. What do you mean by that?
`
`
`
`A.
`
`You —— I think —— I don't remember exactly what
`
`you said, but you were referring to a very small
`
`displacement between the cameras, or some language like
`
`that.
`
`So that doesn't seem_a requirement for stereo,
`
`but it is often the case.
`
`Q.
`
`So you reject that part of my definition that
`
`recites "two images...of a scene recorded from slightly
`
`displaced positions"?
`
`A.
`
`It may not be a completely precise term.
`
`There's some elasticity in this definition.
`
`I'm just
`
`trying to give a sense of that.
`
`Could you repeat the definition again for me?
`
`Q.
`
`Sure.
`
`"Two images...of a scene recorded from
`
`slightly displaced positions, which, when viewed
`
`simultaneously by the respective eyes, provides a
`
`perception of depth."
`
`A. This is also, obviously, referring to stereo
`
`pairs being viewed by a human, which I think is an issue
`
`being —— that's in discussion, as I've understood it.
`
`And I think that it's also possible to have stereo
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 28 of 134
`
`28
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`images that are viewed by algorithms or machine vision
`
`as well. But I —— but for the purposes of this
`
`discussion,
`
`I'm happy with either definition for the
`
`legal definition.
`
`For the academic definition, it could
`
`be any pair of images that views a scene,
`
`that is taken
`
`of a scene.
`
`Q.
`
`So I just want to make sure I understand.
`
`In
`
`your view as an expert within your field,
`
`the concept of
`
`a stereoscopic image pair includes not only human vision
`
`but stereo images, as you say,
`
`that are viewed by
`
`algorithms or machine vision as well?
`
`A.
`
`It could. As I said, it's a very broad term,
`
`and if —— if I was having a discussion with a fellow
`
`colleague at —— at a conference, it could have either
`
`meaning.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`Is the provision —— is it a requirement,
`
`to be
`
`a stereoscopic image pair,
`
`that the images when viewed
`
`simultaneously by the respective eyes of a human
`
`provides a perception of depth?
`
`A. Are you asking me with regard to these patents
`
`or the field in general?
`
`Q.
`
`I'm_asking you about the field.
`
`A.
`
`In the field in general,
`
`the definition is
`
`broad enough to include both —— either meaning.
`
`Q.
`
`So you would reject any definition that limited
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 29 of 134
`
`29
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`a stereoscopic image pair to being one that, when viewed
`
`simultaneously by human eyes, provides a perception of
`
`depth?
`
`A. With regard to this patent?
`
`Q.
`
`I'm asking you in the field.
`
`I'm_not sure what
`
`you mean by in "this patent."
`
`A. Well, when —— let's see.
`
`"Reject."
`
`Could you ask your question again?
`
`Q.
`
`So would you reject any definition of a
`
`
`
`stereoscopic image pair,
`
`from the standpoint of a person
`
`in the field,
`
`that required that when those images were
`
`viewed simultaneously by humans,
`
`that they provide a
`
`perception of depth?
`
`A.
`
`They can —— the definition I would adhere to
`
`would not require that a human actually view them, but
`
`that if a human were to view them, suitably transduced,
`
`the human would get a sense of depth.
`
`Q. That would be a requirement, if suitably
`
`transduced.
`
`I'm going to ask you what that means. But
`
`if —— if so transduced,
`
`that —— that's a requirement?
`
`A.
`
`In the ——
`
`MR. HANLEY: Objection;
`
`form.
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`I would be willing to accept such
`
`a definition. But I don't think it's the only
`
`definition of stereo that would be relevant ——
`
`DepoServices.com
`
`CHASE LITIGATION SERVICES
`
`800.949.8044
`YRD—2008 I Page 30 of 134
`
`3O
`
`
`
`Trevor J. Darrell, Ph.D.
`
`"stereoscopic image" that wou
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
